Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 225 references

Large Language Models and Social Media Information Integrity: Opportunities, Challenges, and Research Directions

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The same LLM capabilities that detect false content on social media also generate it at scale.

desk verdict Useful synthesis of LLMs' dual role in social-media integrity, but the systematic-review scaffolding is undercut by an unreproducible corpus and inconsistent PRISMA arithmetic. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.04375 v1 pith:QX2IUJCO submitted 2026-08-05 cs.CR

Junjie Xiong , Zhengyuan Jiang , Xiaoran Xu , Chi Zhang , Changjia Zhu , Ning Wang , Mingkui Wei , Zhuo Lu
show 2 more authors
Yao Liu Lingyao Li
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CR
keywords largelanguagemodelssocialmediainformationintegritymisinformationdisinformationbotsprivacypreservationcontentmoderation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This review argues that large language models have a dual role in social media information integrity: the same capabilities that let them detect and moderate misinformation, fake news, bots, and privacy violations also let attackers generate convincing deceptive content at scale. The paper surveys 1,048 studies and analyzes 215, organizing the field into content-level information disorder, agent-level social bots, and infrastructure-level privacy. It finds that LLM-based detection improves multilingual screening, fact-checking latency, bot-network discovery, and privacy-aware design, while also introducing new evasion, hallucination, bias, and leakage risks. The central takeaway is that defenders face an asymmetric co-evolutionary contest in which offense iterates cheaply and defense must absorb costs and trust constraints. A sympathetic reader should care because the paper reframes information integrity as a structured, multi-layer problem rather than a set of isolated detection tasks.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the asymmetric co-evolutionary model of attacker-defender interaction: attackers use LLMs to mutate content at low marginal cost, probe detection boundaries, and reuse attack templates across platforms, while defenders must absorb verification costs, avoid false positives that erode user trust, and operate under latency constraints. This asymmetry explains why the same model family can improve detection and simultaneously worsen the threat. The paper organizes the field with a three-layer framework—content layer (misinformation, disinformation, fake news), agent layer (LLM-enhanced social bots), and infrastructure layer (privacy and ethics)—and uses it to map capabilities such as detection, simulation, generation, and privacy preservation onto concrete workflows. The framework is what converts otherwise scattered results into claims about gaps in cross-lingual, real-time, and privacy-preserving research.

What would settle it

Apply the stated eligibility criteria to the retrieved record set and reconcile the screening counts: the flow diagram reports 811 screened, 804 sought, 215 assessed for eligibility, 589 excluded, and 215 included, which cannot all be true simultaneously, so the review is not verifiable unless the numbers and the included-paper list are corrected. As a check on the central dual-role claim, run a held-out multilingual benchmark of an LLM detector against a BERT baseline: the claimed 6 to 10 point recall gain should appear across languages, not only in English.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that LLMs are simultaneously a mitigation tool and a threat generator for social media information integrity, and that this duality is structural rather than incidental. On the mitigation side, the review reports that LLM-enhanced systems improve misinformation-detection recall by 6 to 10 points over BERT baselines, raise bot-detection F1 by up to 9 points on TwiBot-22, and cut fact-checking latency through retrieval-augmented verification. On the threat side, the same models hallucinate plausible falsehoods, enable evasion rates as high as 29.6 percent for LLM-enhanced bots, and let humans identify AI-generated origin only 42 percent of the time. The paper's original contribution is a multi-dimensional framework treating information disorder, social bots, and privacy as connected layers, with cross-lingual detection, real-time monitoring, and privacy-preserving implementation identified as the critical gaps.

Load-bearing premise

The review's conclusions depend on the 215 analyzed papers being a fair, reproducible sample of the field; if the screening cannot be reconstructed or missed large parts of the literature, the identified patterns and gaps may misrepresent the state of research.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • LLM-based moderation will keep gaining ground on known patterns while simultaneously producing new, harder-to-detect synthetic content, so no single detection model can be a stable endpoint.
  • Cross-lingual and low-resource integrity work is the clearest under-served area: the review finds most detection ability is concentrated on English-centric and single-platform benchmarks.
  • Privacy-preserving techniques such as differential privacy and federated learning come with latency and utility trade-offs that currently block real-time deployment in social media monitoring.
  • Real-time integrity systems need to move from post hoc forensics to live authentication and provenance mechanisms as deepfakes and voice clones enter social platforms.
  • Governance should treat the contest as resource-constrained: rate limiting, attribution authentication, and transparency requirements can raise attackers' marginal cost and shift the asymmetry.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the asymmetric co-evolutionary framing is right, then accuracy-based benchmarks will keep overstating detector success; evaluations should also measure cost per evasion and cost per verified correction, not just F1.
  • The paper's gap list points to a concrete next test bed: non-English, low-resource, real-time misinformation streams, where the claimed cross-lingual weakness could be confirmed or refuted directly.
  • The dual-role claim suggests platform policy should assume LLM-generated content is already mixed into organic traffic, making provenance and content labeling a more fundamental intervention than improved post hoc detection.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper is a systematic literature review of the dual role of Large Language Models (LLMs) in social media information integrity. The authors report screening 1,048 records from OpenAlex and performing an in-depth analysis of 215 papers, with the stated finding that LLMs both enable and mitigate threats such as misinformation, disinformation, fake news, social bots, and privacy violations. The review organizes the literature around a multi-dimensional framework spanning content, agent, and infrastructure layers, surveys opportunities and challenges across these dimensions, and identifies research gaps in cross-lingual detection, real-time monitoring, and privacy-preserving implementations. It concludes with recommendations for platforms, researchers, and policymakers.

Significance. If the underlying corpus is reproducible, this review would provide a valuable synthesis of a fast-moving and heterogeneous literature. The paper's central dual-role claim is credible and well-supported by the cited literature, and the authors deserve credit for several good practices: they explicitly define information integrity as a multi-dimensional construct, distinguish descriptive observations from causal claims, hedge quantitative performance gains with caveats about experimental settings, and explicitly treat cross-lingual robustness as an evidence gap rather than a resolved capability. The proposed framework (content/agent/infrastructure) is a sensible organizing taxonomy. However, the paper presents itself as a PRISMA-style systematic review, and the corpus on which all of its patterns, gaps, and framework are claimed to rest is not reproducible as reported. This is a load-bearing weakness for the systematic-review contribution, even though the broad dual-role conclusion would likely survive a corrected methodology.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.1 / Figure 2] The PRISMA flow diagram's arithmetic is internally inconsistent and must be corrected. Starting from 1,048 records, removing 92 duplicates, 140 automation-ineligible records, and 5 other records leaves 811 screened. The diagram then states that 804 reports were sought for retrieval and 7 were not retrieved, which would leave 797 reports assessed for eligibility. Instead, the diagram states 'Reports assessed for eligibility (n = 215)' while simultaneously reporting 589 excluded and 215 included, whose sum is 804. This makes the assessed-eligibility count arithmetically incompatible with both the stated exclusions and the preceding flow. The 'Records match key questions (n = 811)' box also appears to be identical to 'Records screened (n = 811)', and the transition from 811 screened to 804 sought is unexplained. Please reconcile every number in the diagram and ensure that the sum of excluded and included reports equals the number assessed.
  2. [Sec. 3.1, Data preparation] The search is not reproducible as reported. The paper states only that OpenAlex was queried using keywords from three categories—'social media,' 'online platform,' and 'large language model'—but it does not provide the exact query strings, Boolean operators, date restrictions, language filters, or the OpenAlex API parameters used. It also does not provide the full list of 215 included studies or the coding protocol used to extract model popularity, research topics, and platform distributions. Without these, a reader cannot verify that the corpus is representative, that the exclusion decisions were applied consistently, or that the identified patterns and gaps actually emerge from the field rather than from the authors' selection filter. Please supply the full search strings, the complete list of included papers, and a reproducible screening protocol (for example, as supplementary material or a public repository).
  3. [Sec. 3.1 / Figure 2, Reason 3] The dominant exclusion criterion is not auditable. Reason 3, 'insufficient methodological rigor or incomplete evaluation,' accounts for 541 of the 589 excluded reports (nearly 70% of all exclusions), yet the paper provides no rubric, checklist, or inter-rater agreement measure for this judgment. Since this single subjective filter removes the majority of the candidate literature, the subsequent patterns and framework may reflect the authors' quality judgments rather than the state of the field. Please operationalize this criterion (for example, with explicit quality dimensions, thresholds, and a pilot-coding stage) and report how it was applied, ideally with a flow diagram that includes numbers at each stage that sum consistently.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figure 7] The figure contains typos in the labels: 'Privacy-perserving' should be 'Privacy-preserving' and 'Information Intergrity' should be 'Information Integrity.'
  2. [Figure 2] The box 'Records match key questions (n = 811)' duplicates the 'Records screened (n = 811)' count and does not add information; if it is meant to represent a topic-match step, it needs a distinct count and a description of the matching procedure.
  3. [Sec. 4.1, paragraph on FactAgent] The sentence 'Agentic pipelines like FactAgent [56]' appears to cite reference [56], which is a paper on bot detection ('What Does the Bot Say?'), rather than a fact-checking agent pipeline; please verify and correct this citation.
  4. [Sec. 4.1 and Sec. 5.1] Several quantitative performance claims (for example, 'recall by 6 to 10 percentage points,' '9 percentage point gains in F1,' 'improvements on the order of 12%,' '35% improvement in fact-checker latency,' '5–10%' and '8–12%' accuracy gains) are presented as if they are comparable, but they come from different tasks, datasets, and evaluation protocols. Since the paper does not systematically tabulate these against the 215-paper corpus, I recommend either adding a synthesis table with the underlying conditions or explicitly labeling all such numbers as illustrative and non-comparable.
  5. [References] Several references are duplicated: [1] and [2] are the same paper, [18] and [19] are the same paper, and [50] and [51] are the same paper. These duplicates should be merged.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the review's dual-role claim is grounded in external literature, and the only self-citation is peripheral and non-load-bearing.

full rationale

This is a literature review, not a derivation or empirical modeling paper. Its central claim that LLMs both enhance detection/defense and enable deceptive content generation is supported by a broad set of independent external works (e.g., Feng et al. [56], Staab et al. [170], Shah et al. [158]) and does not depend on any parameter fitted to the reviewed corpus. The proposed framework is an organizing taxonomy, not a model whose predictions reduce to its inputs. The one self-citation ([193], Xiong et al., EMNLP 2025 findings) appears only in a list of prompt-injection and privacy risks in Section 4.2 ('vulnerable to advanced prompt engineering exploits [73, 170, 193]') and is not load-bearing for the paper's main conclusions. There is no imported uniqueness theorem, no ansatz smuggled in via citation, and no renaming of a known result as a new derivation. The most significant weakness is the unreproducible PRISMA screening in Section 3.1 and Figure 2: the reported flow arithmetic is internally inconsistent (811 screened, 804 sought, 215 assessed for eligibility, yet 589 excluded + 215 included = 804), the exact OpenAlex queries are not given, and the largest exclusion reason (n = 541) lacks a rubric. This is a correctness and reproducibility concern about corpus selection, not a circularity concern: even if the corpus were biased or unverifiable, the review's conclusions are not defined in terms of the screening output. Accordingly, the circularity score is low, reflecting the absence of any self-definitional, fitted-input, or self-citation-load-bearing step.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The review is an evidence synthesis, so its central claims depend on the completeness and quality of the included literature and on accepting the primary studies' reported results. It introduces no new mathematical axioms or fitted parameters.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The PRISMA-style screening correctly captures the relevant literature and the 215 included papers are representative of the field.
    The paper's identified patterns and gaps rest entirely on this selection; Section 3.1 and Figure 2 describe the screening, but the flow diagram has inconsistent numbers and the exact queries are not provided.
  • domain assumption Reported performance gains in primary studies are accepted as reliable evidence.
    The review reports quantitative improvements from individual studies (e.g., Sections 4.1, 5.1, A.2) without independent verification or a meta-analytic synthesis.
  • domain assumption Standard definitions of misinformation, disinformation, fake news, social bots, and privacy from cited sources are appropriate.
    The taxonomy in Table 1 adopts definitions from Wardle, Allcott, Nissenbaum, and others; the review's categorization depends on these prior definitions being fit for purpose.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Large Language Models and Social Media Information Integrity: Opportunities, Challenges, and Research Directions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QX2IUJCO

@misc{pith2026260804375,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Large Language Models and Social Media Information Integrity: Opportunities, Challenges, and Research Directions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QX2IUJCO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.04375}
}
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful tools that impact information integrity on social media platforms. This comprehensive review examines the dual role of LLMs in both facilitating and mitigating various information integrity challenges, including misinformation, disinformation, fake news, social bots, and privacy concerns. \textcolor{black}{We conduct a comprehensive review of the literature from 2019 to 2024, screening 1048 studies and performing an in-depth analysis of 215 representative papers. This systematic approach allows us to identify key patterns in how LLMs influence the information security in social media ecosystems.} Through a systematic analysis of papers from multiple databases, our findings reveal that while LLMs can enhance detection capabilities for malicious content and enable sophisticated defense mechanisms, they simultaneously pose risks by enabling the generation of highly convincing, deceptive content. We categorize and analyze the potential and challenges across different dimensions of information integrity, examining technical capabilities, ethical implications, and privacy concerns. The study demonstrates critical gaps in current approaches, particularly in cross-lingual detection, real-time monitoring, and privacy-preserving implementations. We conclude by proposing future research directions and recommendations for stakeholders to leverage LLMs while mitigating risks in social media information integrity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.04375 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Integration and Impact of LLMs in Social Media Information Integrity. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. PRISMA flow of the study screening. Records are retrieved via OpenAlex [131], which aggre￾gates scholarly metadata primarily from Microsoft Aca￾demic Graph/Open Academic Graph and Crossref, with additional contributions from ORCID, DOAJ, PubMed, the ISSN International Centre, the Internet Archive, and arXiv. Given the rapid pace of LLM and information in￾tegrity research, we include a limited number of arXiv preprin… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Model popularity. Visualization of the yearly prevalence of different LLMs. To comprehensively understand the current landscape of LLMs in social media integrity research, our analysis focuses on four key dimensions: model adoption (types and scales of LLMs being utilized), architectural evolu￾tion (development in model structures and capabilities), research focus areas (primary integrity challenges be￾ing addressed… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Architectural trend. Temporal break￾down of encoder-only, decoder-only, and encoder-decoder LLM, reflecting the shift￾ing architectural choices [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Evolving research topics. Display of the annual distribution of trending topics in social media integrity research. Evaluation practices in LLM-based security research are shaped by the heterogeneity of tasks, ranging from mis￾information detection and bot identificati…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Temporal Analysis of LLM-based Social Media Integrity Research (2019-2024) Platform-specific research distribution visualized through bubble charts, where bubble size indicates study frequency. The visualization reveals temporal trends and platform-specific focus in LL…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: This figure illustrates four representative subdomain workflows (a–d) in information security research. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Potentials in LLMs for social media information integrity. The figure illustrates key capabilities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Challenges in LLMs for social media information integrity. The figure illustrates the key capabilities of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

225 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Kawsar Ahmed, Md Osama, Md Sirajul Islam, Md Taosiful Islam, Avishek Das, and Mohammed Moshiul Hoque. 2023. Score_isall_you_need at blp-2023 task 1: A hierarchical classification approach to detect violence inciting text using transformers. InProceedings of the First Workshop on Bangla Language Processing (BLP-2023). 185–189

    2023

  2. [2]

    Kawsar Ahmed, Md Osama, Md Sirajul Islam, Md Taosiful Islam, Avishek Das, and Mohammed Moshiul Hoque. 2023. Score_IsAll_you_need at BLP-2023 task 1: A hierarchical classification approach to detect violence inciting text using transformers. InProceedings of the First Workshop on Bangla Language Processing (BLP-2023)(Singapore). Association for Computation...

    2023

  3. [18]

    Simone Bonechi. 2024. Development of an automated moderator for deliberative events.Electronics13, 3 (2024), 544

    2024

  4. [19]

    2018.Network propaganda: Manipulation, disinformation, and radical- ization in American politics

    Yochai Benkler, Robert Faris, and Hal Roberts. 2018.Network propaganda: Manipulation, disinformation, and radical- ization in American politics. Oxford University Press

    2018

  5. [47]

    Yao Dou, Isadora Krsek, Tarek Naous, Anubha Kabra, Sauvik Das, Alan Ritter, and Wei Xu. 2024. Reducing Privacy Risks in Online Self-Disclosures with Language Models. InProceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), Lun-Wei Ku, Andre Martins, and Vivek Srikumar (Eds.). Association for Comput...

    doi:10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.741 2024

  6. [48]

    David Dukic, Dominik Keca, and Dominik Stipic. 2020. Are you human? Detecting bots on twitter using BERT. In 2020 IEEE 7th International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA)(sydney, Australia). IEEE

    2020

  7. [50]

    Clay Duncan and Ian Mcculloh. 2023. Unmasking Bias in Chat GPT Responses. InProceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining(Kusadasi Turkiye). ACM, New York, NY, USA

    2023

  8. [51]

    Chris Dulhanty, Jason L Deglint, Ibrahim Ben Daya, and Alexander Wong. 2019. Taking a stance on fake news: Towards automatic disinformation assessment via deep bidirectional transformer language models for stance detection.arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.11951(2019)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

Show all 225 references
  1. [3]

    Hani Al-Omari, Malak Abdullah, Ola Al-Titi, and Samira Shaikh. 2019. Justdeep at nlp4if 2019 shared task: propaganda detection using ensemble deep learning models.EMNLP-IJCNLP2019 (2019), 113

    2019

  2. [4]

    Hani Al-Omari, Malak Abdullah, Ola AlTiti, and Samira Shaikh. 2019. JUSTDeep at NLP4IF 2019 task 1: Propaganda detection using ensemble deep learning models. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Natural Language Processing for Internet Freedom: Censorship, Disinformation, a...

    2019

  3. [5]

    Jawaher Alghamdi, Yuqing Lin, and Suhuai Luo. 2024. Cross-domain fake news detection using a prompt-based approach.Future Internet16, 8 (2024), 286

    2024

  4. [6]

    Hunt Allcott and Matthew Gentzkow. 2017. Social media and fake news in the 2016 election.Journal of economic perspectives31, 2 (2017), 211–236

    2017

  5. [7]

    Sawsan Alshattnawi, Amani Shatnawi, Anas M R AlSobeh, and Aws A Magableh. 2024. Beyond word-based model embeddings: Contextualized representations for enhanced social media spam detection.Appl. Sci. (Basel)14, 6 (March 2024), 2254

    2024

  6. [8]

    Sacha Altay, Manon Berriche, Hendrik Heuer, Johan Farkas, and Steven Rathje. 2023. A survey of expert views on misinformation: Definitions, determinants, solutions, and future of the field.Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review4, 4 (2023), 1–34

    2023

  7. [9]

    Dimitris Asimopoulos, Ilias Siniosoglou, Vasileios Argyriou, Thomai Karamitsou, Eleftherios Fountoukidis, Sotirios K Goudos, Ioannis D Moscholios, Konstantinos E Psannis, and Panagiotis Sarigiannidis. 2024. Benchmarking advanced text anonymisation methods: A comparative study ...

    2024

  8. [10]

    Hadi Askari, Anshuman Chhabra, Bernhard Clemm von Hohenberg, Michael Heseltine, and Magdalena Wojcieszak

  9. [11]

    Maurizio Atzori, Eleonora Calò, Loredana Caruccio, Stefano Cirillo, Giuseppe Polese, and Giandomenico Solimando

  10. [12]

    Navid Ayoobi, Sadat Shahriar, and Arjun Mukherjee. 2023. The looming threat of fake and llm-generated linkedin profiles: Challenges and opportunities for detection and prevention. InProceedings of the 34th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media. 1–10

    2023

  11. [13]

    Evaluating password strength based on information spread on social networks: A combined approach relying on data reconstruction and generative models.Online Soc. Netw. Media42, 100278 (Aug. 2024), 100278

    2024

  12. [14]

    Yuntao Bai, Andy Jones, Kamal Ndousse, Amanda Askell, Anna Chen, Nova DasSarma, Dawn Drain, Stanislav Fort, Deep Ganguli, Tom Henighan, et al. 2022. Training a helpful and harmless assistant with reinforcement learning from human feedback.arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.05862(2022)

    2022 arXiv

  13. [15]

    Jackie Ayoub, X Jessie Yang, and Feng Zhou. 2021. Combat COVID-19 infodemic using explainable natural language processing models.Information Processing & Management58, 4 (2021), 102569. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: August 2026. Large Language Models and Social ...

    2021

  14. [16]

    Dipto Barman, Ziyi Guo, and Owen Conlan. 2024. The dark side of language models: Exploring the potential of llms in multimedia disinformation generation and dissemination.Machine Learning with Applications(2024), 100545

    2024

  15. [17]

    Calvin Bao and Marine Carpuat. 2024. Keep it Private: Unsupervised Privatization of Online Text. InProceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers), Kevin Duh,...

    2024 doi

  16. [20]

    Ali Borji and Mehrdad Mohammadian. 2023. Battle of the wordsmiths: Comparing ChatGPT, GPT-4, Claude, and bard.SSRN Electron. J.(2023)

    2023

  17. [21]

    Simone Bonechi. 2024. Development of an automated moderator for deliberative events.Electronics (Basel)13, 3 (Jan. 2024), 544

    2024

  18. [22]

    Olivia Brown, Robert M Davison, Stephanie Decker, David A Ellis, James Faulconbridge, Julie Gore, Michelle Green- wood, Gazi Islam, Christina Lubinski, Niall G MacKenzie, et al . 2024. Theory-driven perspectives on generative artificial intelligence in business and management....

    2024

  19. [23]

    Robert Brandt. 2023. AI-Assisted Medicine: Possibly Helpful, Possibly Terrifying.Emergency Medicine News45, 7 (2023), 20

    2023

  20. [24]

    Yunna Cai, Fan Wang, Haowei Wang, and Qianwen Qian. 2023. Public sentiment analysis and topic modeling regarding ChatGPT in mental health on Reddit: Negative sentiments increase over time.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.15800(2023)

    2023 arXiv

  21. [25]

    George-Octavian Bărbulescu and Peter Triantafillou. 2024. To each (textual sequence) its own: improving memorized- data unlearning in large language models. InProceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning (Vienna, Austria)(ICML’24). JMLR.org, Article 121...

    2024

  22. [26]

    Rosario Catelli, Hamido Fujita, Giuseppe De Pietro, and Massimo Esposito. 2022. Deceptive reviews and sentiment polarity: Effective link by exploiting BERT.Expert Syst. Appl.209, 118290 (Dec. 2022), 118290

    2022

  23. [27]

    Brown, Dawn Song, Colin Raffel, et al

    Nicholas Carlini, Florian Tramer, Eric Wallace, Matthew Jagielski, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Katherine Lee, Adam Roberts, Tom B. Brown, Dawn Song, Colin Raffel, et al . 2021. Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models. In Proceedings of the 30th USENIX Security Symposium. U...

    2021

  24. [28]

    Vaishali Chawla and Yatin Kapoor. 2023. A hybrid framework for bot detection on twitter: Fusing digital DNA with BERT.Multimed. Tools Appl.82, 20 (Aug. 2023), 30831–30854

    2023

  25. [29]

    2024.Social Media and News Fact Sheet

    Pew Research Center. 2024.Social Media and News Fact Sheet. https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact- sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/

    2024

  26. [30]

    Canyu Chen and Kai Shu. 2024. Can LLM-Generated Misinformation Be Detected?. InThe Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations. https://openreview.net/forum?id=ccxD4mtkTU

    2024

  27. [31]

    Ben Chen, Bin Chen, Dehong Gao, Qijin Chen, Chengfu Huo, Xiaonan Meng, Weijun Ren, and Yang Zhou. 2021. Transformer-based language model fine-tuning methods for COVID-19 fake news detection. InCombating online hostile posts in regional languages during emergency situation: Fir...

    2021

  28. [32]

    Xiaoxiao Chi, Xuyun Zhang, Yan Wang, Lianyong Qi, Amin Beheshti, Xiaolong Xu, Kim-Kwang Raymond Choo, Shuo Wang, and Hongsheng Hu. 2024. Shadow-Free Membership Inference Attacks: Recommender Systems Are More Vulnerable Than You Thought. InIJCAI

    2024

  29. [33]

    Tsun-Hin Cheung and Kin-Man Lam. 2023. Factllama: Optimizing instruction-following language models with external knowledge for automated fact-checking. In2023 Asia Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA ASC). IEEE, 846–853

    2023

  30. [34]

    Jeff Christensen, Jared M Hansen, and Paul Wilson. 2024. Understanding the role and impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) hallucination within consumers’ tourism decision-making processes.Curr. Issues Tourism(Jan. 2024)

    2024

  31. [35]

    Eun Cheol Choi and Emilio Ferrara. 2024. Automated claim matching with large language models: empowering fact- checkers in the fight against misinformation. InCompanion Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2024. 1441–1449

    2024

  32. [36]

    Sean M Coffey, Joseph W Catudal, and Nathaniel D Bastian. 2024. Differential privacy to mathematically secure fine-tuned large language models for linguistic steganography. InAssurance and Security for AI-enabled Systems, Vol. 13054. SPIE, 160–171

    2024

  33. [37]

    2025.What is a social media bot?https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/bots/what-is-a-social-media-bot/ Accessed: March 17, 2025

    Cloudflare. 2025.What is a social media bot?https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/bots/what-is-a-social-media-bot/ Accessed: March 17, 2025

    2025

  34. [38]

    Alexis Conneau, Kartikay Khandelwal, Naman Goyal, Vishrav Chaudhary, Guillaume Wenzek, Francisco Guzmán, Edouard Grave, Myle Ott, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Veselin Stoyanov. 2020. Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scale. InProceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting...

    2020 doi

  35. [39]

    Henry Collier. 2024. AI: The Future of Social Engineering!Proc. Eur. Conf. Inf. Warf. Secur.23, 1 (June 2024). , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: August 2026. 28 Xiong et al

    2024

  36. [40]

    Limeng Cui and Dongwon Lee. 2020. Coaid: Covid-19 healthcare misinformation dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.00885(2020)

    2020 arXiv

  37. [41]

    Nicole A Cooke. 2017. Posttruth, truthiness, and alternative facts: Information behavior and critical information consumption for a new age.The library quarterly87, 3 (2017), 211–221

    2017

  38. [42]

    Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. (2019), 4171–4186

    2019

  39. [43]

    Badhan Chandra Das, M Hadi Amini, and Yanzhao Wu. 2025. Security and privacy challenges of large language models: A survey.Comput. Surveys57, 6 (2025), 1–39

    2025

  40. [44]

    Dilara Dogan, Bahadir Altun, Muhammed Said Zengin, Mucahid Kutlu, and Tamer Elsayed. 2023. Catch Me If You Can: Deceiving Stance Detection and Geotagging Models to Protect Privacy of Individuals on Twitter. InProceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social M...

    2023

  41. [45]

    McCauley

    Jane Dickson and Thomas S. McCauley. 2023. The Ethics of AI in Mental Health: Safeguarding Patient Privacy in Online Settings.ACM Transactions on Internet Technology23, 2 (2023), 1–24

    2023

  42. [46]

    Sunny Duan, Mikail Khona, Abhiram Iyer, Rylan Schaeffer, and Ila Rani Fiete. 2025. Uncovering Latent Memories in Large Language Models. InProceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR)

    2025

  43. [49]

    David Dukić, Dominik Keča, and Dominik Stipić. 2020. Are you human? Detecting bots on Twitter Using BERT. In 2020 IEEE 7th International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA). IEEE, 631–636

    2020

  44. [52]

    Almandouh, Mohammed F Alrahmawy, Mohamed Eisa, Mohamed Elhoseny, and AS Tolba

    Mohammed E. Almandouh, Mohammed F Alrahmawy, Mohamed Eisa, Mohamed Elhoseny, and AS Tolba. 2024. Ensemble based high performance deep learning models for fake news detection.Scientific Reports14, 1 (2024), 26591

    2024

  45. [53]

    Clay Duncan and Ian Mcculloh. 2023. Unmasking bias in Chat GPT responses. InProceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining. 687–691

    2023

  46. [54]

    Shangbin Feng, Zhaoxuan Tan, Herun Wan, Ningnan Wang, Zilong Chen, Binchi Zhang, Qinghua Zheng, Wenqian Zhang, Zhenyu Lei, Shujie Yang, et al. 2022. Twibot-22: Towards graph-based twitter bot detection.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems35 (2022), 35254–35269

    2022

  47. [55]

    Mengyi Wang Fangfang Shan, Huifang Sun. 2024. Multimodal Social Media Fake News Detection Based on Similarity Inference and Adversarial Networks.Computers, Materials & Continua79, 1 (2024), 581–605

    2024

  48. [56]

    Shangbin Feng, Herun Wan, Ningnan Wang, Zhaoxuan Tan, Minnan Luo, and Yulia Tsvetkov. 2024. What Does the Bot Say? Opportunities and Risks of Large Language Models in Social Media Bot Detection. InProceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Ling...

    2024 doi

  49. [57]

    Shangbin Feng, Herun Wan, Ningnan Wang, Jundong Li, and Minnan Luo. 2021. Twibot-20: A comprehensive twitter bot detection benchmark. InProceedings of the 30th ACM international conference on information & knowledge management. 4485–4494

    2021

  50. [58]

    Matt Fredrikson, Somesh Jha, and Thomas Ristenpart. 2015. Model Inversion Attacks that Exploit Confidence Information and Basic Countermeasures. InProceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS). ACM, 1322–1333

    2015

  51. [59]

    Chiarello Filippo, Giordano Vito, Spada Irene, Barandoni Simone, and Fantoni Gualtiero. 2024. Future applications of generative large language models: A data-driven case study on ChatGPT.Technovation133 (2024), 103002

    2024

  52. [60]

    Luyu Gao, Zhuyun Dai, Panupong Pasupat, Anthony Chen, Arun Tejasvi Chaganty, Yicheng Fan, Vincent Zhao, Ni Lao, Hongrae Lee, Da-Cheng Juan, et al. 2023. Rarr: Researching and revising what language models say, using language models. InProceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of ...

    2023

  53. [61]

    Isabel O Gallegos, Ryan A Rossi, Joe Barrow, Md Mehrab Tanjim, Sungchul Kim, Franck Dernoncourt, Tong Yu, Ruiyi Zhang, and Nesreen K Ahmed. 2024. Bias and fairness in large language models: A survey.Computational Linguistics 50, 3 (2024), 1097–1179. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . ...

    2024

  54. [62]

    Andres Garcia-Silva, Cristian Berrio, and Jose Manuel Gomez-Perez. 2021. Understanding Transformers for Bot Detection in Twitter. (2021). arXiv:2104.06182

    2021 arXiv

  55. [63]

    José Antonio García-Díaz and Rafael Valencia-García. 2022. Compilation and evaluation of the Spanish SatiCorpus 2021 for satire identification using linguistic features and transformers.Complex Intell. Syst.8, 2 (April 2022), 1723–1736

    2022

  56. [64]

    Razan Ghanem, Hasan Erbay, and Khaled Bakour. 2023. Contents-based spam detection on social networks using RoBERTa embedding and stacked BLSTM.SN Comput. Sci.4, 4 (May 2023)

    2023

  57. [65]

    Razan Ghanem and Hasan Erbay. 2020. Context-dependent model for spam detection on social networks.SN Appl. Sci.2, 9 (Sept. 2020)

    2020

  58. [66]

    Erwin Gielens, Jakub Sowula, and Philip Leifeld. 2025. Goodbye human annotators? Content analysis of social policy debates using ChatGPT.Journal of Social Policy(2025), 1–20

    2025

  59. [67]

    Masood Ghayoomi. 2023. Enriching contextualized semantic representation with textual information transmission for COVID-19 fake news detection: A study on English and Persian.Digital Scholarship in the Humanities38, 1 (2023), 99–110

    2023

  60. [68]

    Tianle Gu, Zeyang Zhou, Kexin Huang, Liang Dandan, Yixu Wang, Haiquan Zhao, Yuanqi Yao, Yujiu Yang, Yan Teng, Yu Qiao, et al. 2024. Mllmguard: A multi-dimensional safety evaluation suite for multimodal large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems37 ...

    2024

  61. [69]

    Nir Grinberg, Kenneth Joseph, Lisa Friedland, Briony Swire-Thompson, and David Lazer. 2019. Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election.Science363, 6425 (2019), 374–378

    2019

  62. [70]

    Ankur Gupta*, School of Information Technology, RGPV, Bhopal, India., Yogendra P S Maravi, Nishchol Mishra, School of Information Technology, RGPV Bhopal, India., and School of Information Technology, RGPV Bhopal, India

  63. [71]

    Qinglang Guo, Haiyong Xie, Yangyang Li, Wen Ma, and Chao Zhang. 2021. Social bots detection via fusing BERT and graph convolutional networks.Symmetry (Basel)14, 1 (Dec. 2021), 30

    2021

  64. [72]

    Ehtesham Hashmi, Sule Yildirim Yayilgan, Muhammad Mudassar Yamin, Subhan Ali, and Mohamed Abomhara. 2024. Advancing Fake News Detection: Hybrid Deep Learning With FastText and Explainable AI.IEEE Access12 (2024), 44462–44480

    2024

  65. [73]

    Katherine Haynes, Hossein Shirazi, and Indrakshi Ray. 2021. Lightweight URL-based phishing detection using natural language processing transformers for mobile devices.Procedia Comput. Sci.191 (2021), 127–134

    2021

  66. [74]

    Fouzi Harrag, Maria Dabbah, Kareem Darwish, and Ahmed Abdelali. 2020. Bert Transformer Model for Detecting Arabic GPT2 Auto-Generated Tweets. InProceedings of the Fifth Arabic Natural Language Processing Workshop (W ANLP). Association for Computational Linguistics, Barcelona, ...

    2020

  67. [75]

    Maryam Heidari and James H Jones. 2020. Using BERT to extract topic-independent sentiment features for social media bot detection. In2020 11th IEEE Annual Ubiquitous Computing, Electronics & Mobile Communication Conference (UEMCON)(New York, NY, USA). IEEE

    2020

  68. [76]

    Xing Hu, Feifei Niu, Junkai Chen, Xin Zhou, Junwei Zhang, Junda He, Xin Xia, and David Lo. 2025. Assessing and advancing benchmarks for evaluating large language models in software engineering tasks.ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology(2025)

    2025

  69. [77]

    The ChatGPT bot is causing panic now – but it’ll soon be as mundane a tool as Excel

    Dan Heaton, Jeremie Clos, Elena Nichele, and Joel E Fischer. 2024. “The ChatGPT bot is causing panic now – but it’ll soon be as mundane a tool as Excel”: analysing topics, sentiment and emotions relating to ChatGPT on Twitter.Pers. Ubiquitous Comput.(May 2024)

    2024

  70. [78]

    Jinyuan Huang, Zhao Song, Keliang Li, Shuang Zhang, Sitao Duan, Bo Li, and Haitao Zhao. 2020. InstaHide: Instance-hiding Schemes for Private Discourse on Public Training. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning (ICML)

    2020

  71. [79]

    Kexin Huang, Xiangyang Liu, Qianyu Guo, Tianxiang Sun, Jiawei Sun, Yaru Wang, Zeyang Zhou, Yixu Wang, Yan Teng, Xipeng Qiu, Yingchun Wang, and Dahua Lin. 2024. Flames: Benchmarking Value Alignment of LLMs in Chinese. InProceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American C...

    2024

  72. [80]

    Hanjuan Huang, Hsuan-Ting Peng, and Hsing-Kuo Pao. 2023. Fake News Detection via Sentiment Neutralization. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData). IEEE, 5780–5789

    2023

  73. [81]

    Sungsoon Jang, Yeseul Cho, Hyeonmin Seong, Taejong Kim, and Hosung Woo. 2024. The Development of a Named Entity Recognizer for Detecting Personal Information Using a Korean Pretrained Language Model.Applied Sciences 14, 13 (2024), 5682

    2024

  74. [82]

    Shan Jiang, Miriam Metzger, Andrew Flanagin, and Christo Wilson. 2020. Modeling and measuring expressed (dis) belief in (mis) information. InProceedings of the international AAAI conference on web and social media, Vol. 14. 315–326

    2020

  75. [83]

    Steve Huntsman, Michael Robinson, and Ludmilla Huntsman. 2024. Prospects for inconsistency detection using large language models and sheaves.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.16713(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Bianca Montes Jones and Marwan Omar. 2023. Detection of twitter spam with language models: A case study on how to use BERT to protect children from spam on twitter. In2023 Congress in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, & Applied Computing (CSCE)(Las Vegas, NV, USA). IEEE, 511–516

    2023

  77. [85]

    Niket Tandon Kandpal, Samuel Bowman, Ethan Perez, and Colin Raffel. 2023. Quantifying Memorization Across Neural Language Models. InProceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR)

    2023

  78. [86]

    Weiqiang Jin, Ningwei Wang, Tao Tao, Bohang Shi, Haixia Bi, Biao Zhao, Hao Wu, Haibin Duan, and Guang Yang

  79. [87]

    A veracity dissemination consistency-based few-shot fake news detection framework by synergizing adversarial and contrastive self-supervised learning.Scientific Reports14, 1 (2024), 19470

    2024

  80. [88]

    Kornraphop Kawintiranon, Lisa Singh, and Ceren Budak. 2022. Traditional and context-specific spam detection in low resource settings.Mach. Learn.111, 7 (July 2022), 2515–2536

    2022

  81. [89]

    Indra Kertati, Carlos Y T Sanchez, Muhammad Basri, Muhammad Najib Husain, and Hery Winoto Tj. 2023. Public relations’ disruption model on chatgpt issue.J. Studi Komun. (Indones. J. Commun. Stud.)7, 1 (March 2023), 034–048

    2023

  82. [90]

    Debanjana Kar, Mohit Bhardwaj, Suranjana Samanta, and Amar Prakash Azad. 2021. No rumours please! a multi- indic-lingual approach for covid fake-tweet detection. (2021), 1–5

    2021

  83. [91]

    Timo Kaufmann, Paul Weng, Viktor Bengs, and Eyke Hüllermeier. 2024. A survey of reinforcement learning from human feedback.Transactions on Machine Learning Research(2024)

    2024

  84. [92]

    Myeong Gyu Kim, Minjung Kim, Jae Hyun Kim, and Kyungim Kim. 2022. Fine-tuning BERT models to classify misinformation on garlic and COVID-19 on Twitter.Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health19, 9 (April 2022), 5126

    2022

  85. [93]

    Siwon Kim, Sangdoo Yun, Hwaran Lee, Martin Gubri, Sungroh Yoon, and Seong Joon Oh. 2024. Propile: Probing privacy leakage in large language models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36 (2024)

    2024

  86. [94]

    Anwar Hussen Wadud, M

    Ashfia Jannat Keya, Md. Anwar Hussen Wadud, M. F. Mridha, Mohammed Alatiyyah, and Md. Abdul Hamid. 2022. AugFake-BERT: Handling Imbalance through Augmentation of Fake News Using BERT to Enhance the Performance of Fake News Classification.Applied Sciences12, 17 (2022)

    2022

  87. [95]

    M Mehdi Kholoosi, M Ali Babar, and Roland Croft. 2024. A Qualitative Study on Using ChatGPT for Software Security: Perception vs. Practicality. (2024), 107–117

    2024

  88. [96]

    Jianqiao Lai, Xinran Yang, Wenyue Luo, Linjiang Zhou, Langchen Li, Yongqi Wang, and Xiaochuan Shi. 2024. RumorLLM: A Rumor Large Language Model-Based Fake-News-Detection Data-Augmentation Approach.Applied Sciences14, 8 (2024)

    2024

  89. [97]

    Guangchen Lan, Huseyin A Inan, Sahar Abdelnabi, Janardhan Kulkarni, Lukas Wutschitz, Reza Shokri, Christopher G Brinton, and Robert Sim. 2025. Contextual integrity in llms via reasoning and reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.04245(2025)

    2025

  90. [98]

    Sahas Koka, Anthony Vuong, and Anish Kataria. 2024. Evaluating the Efficacy of Large Language Models in Detecting Fake News: A Comparative Analysis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.06584(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Shubham Kumar, Shivang Garg, Yatharth Vats, and Anil Singh Parihar. 2021. Content based bot detection using bot language model and BERT embeddings. In2021 5th International Conference on Computer, Communication and Signal Processing (ICCCSP)(Chennai, India). IEEE

    2021

  92. [100]

    Siyu Li, Jin Yang, and Kui Zhao. 2023. Are you in a masquerade? exploring the behavior and impact of large language model driven social bots in online social networks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.10337(2023)

    2023 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Wei Li, Jiawen Deng, Jiali You, Yuanyuan He, Yan Zhuang, and Fuji Ren. 2025. ETS-MM: A Multi-Modal Social Bot Detection Model Based on Enhanced Textual Semantic Representation. InProceedings of the ACM on Web Conference

    2025

  94. [102]

    David MJ Lazer, Matthew A Baum, Yochai Benkler, Adam J Berinsky, Kelly M Greenhill, Filippo Menczer, Miriam J Metzger, Brendan Nyhan, Gordon Pennycook, David Rothschild, et al. 2018. The science of fake news.Science359, 6380 (2018), 1094–1096

    2018

  95. [103]

    Jaeyoung Lee, Ximing Lu, Jack Hessel, Faeze Brahman, Youngjae Yu, Yonatan Bisk, Yejin Choi, and Saadia Gabriel. 2024. How to Train Your Fact Verifier: Knowledge Transfer with Multimodal Open Models. InFindings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024, Yaser...

    2024 doi

  96. [104]

    Yufan Li, Zhan Wang, and Theo Papatheodorou. 2024. Staying vigilant in the Age of AI: From content generation to content authentication.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.00922(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Ying Lian, Huiting Tang, Mengting Xiang, and Xuefan Dong. 2024. Public attitudes and sentiments toward ChatGPT in China: A text mining analysis based on social media.Technol. Soc.76, 102442 (March 2024), 102442

    2024

  98. [106]

    Luyang Lin, Lingzhi Wang, Jinsong Guo, and Kam-Fai Wong. 2025. Investigating bias in llm-based bias detection: Disparities between llms and human perception. InProceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics. 10634–10649

    2025

  99. [107]

    Xuechen Li, Florian Tramer, Percy Liang, and Tatsunori Hashimoto. 2022. Large Language Models Can Be Strong Differentially Private Learners. InProceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR)

    2022

  100. [108]

    Xinyi Li, Yongfeng Zhang, and Edward C Malthouse. 2024. Large Language Model Agent for Fake News Detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.01593(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Xiaohan Liu, Yue Zhan, Hao Jin, Yuan Wang, and Yi Zhang. 2023. Research on the classification methods of social bots.Electronics (Basel)12, 14 (July 2023), 3030

    2023

  102. [110]

    Yuhan Liu, Xiuying Chen, Xiaoqing Zhang, Xing Gao, Ji Zhang, and Rui Yan. 2024. From Skepticism to Acceptance: Simulating the Attitude Dynamics Toward Fake News. InProceedings of the Thirty-Third International Joint Confer- ence on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-24, Kate Larso...

    2024

  103. [111]

    Yifan Liu, Yaokun Liu, Zelin Li, Ruichen Yao, Yang Zhang, and Dong Wang. 2025. Modality interactive mixture-of- experts for fake news detection. InProceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2025. 5139–5150

    2025

  104. [112]

    Songyang Liu, Chaozhuo Li, Jiameng Qiu, Xi Zhang, Feiran Huang, Litian Zhang, Yiming Hei, and Philip S Yu. 2025. The Scales of Justitia: A Comprehensive Survey on Safety Evaluation of LLMs.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.11094(2025)

    2025 arXiv

  105. [113]

    Xuannan Liu, Zekun Li, Pei Pei Li, Huaibo Huang, Shuhan Xia, Xing Cui, Linzhi Huang, Weihong Deng, and Zhaofeng He. [n. d.]. MMFakeBench: A Mixed-Source Multimodal Misinformation Detection Benchmark for LVLMs. InThe Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations

  106. [114]

    Lundberg and Su-In Lee

    Scott M. Lundberg and Su-In Lee. 2017. A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), Vol. 30. 4765–4774

    2017

  107. [115]

    Hanjia Lyu, Jinfa Huang, Daoan Zhang, Yongsheng Yu, Xinyi Mou, Jinsheng Pan, Zhengyuan Yang, Zhongyu Wei, and Jiebo Luo. 2025. GPT-4V(ision) as A Social Media Analysis Engine.ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol.16, 3, Article 50 (April 2025), 54 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3709005

    2025 doi

  108. [116]

    SreeJagadeesh Malla and PJA Alphonse. 2022. Fake or real news about COVID-19? Pretrained transformer model to detect potential misleading news.The European Physical Journal Special Topics231, 18 (2022), 3347–3356

    2022

  109. [117]

    Ye Liu, Jiajun Zhu, Kai Zhang, Haoyu Tang, Yanghai Zhang, Xukai Liu, Qi Liu, and Enhong Chen. 2024. Detect, Investigate, Judge and Determine: A Novel LLM-based Framework for Few-shot Fake News Detection.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.08952(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  110. [118]

    Zhuoran Lu, Sheshera Mysore, Tara Safavi, Jennifer Neville, Longqi Yang, and Mengting Wan. 2024. Corporate communication companion (CCC): An LLM-empowered writing assistant for workplace social media.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.04656(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  111. [119]

    Nikhil Mehta and Dan Goldwasser. 2024. Using RL to Identify Divisive Perspectives Improves LLMs Abilities to Identify Communities on Social Media. InFindings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024. 5371–5390

    2024

  112. [120]

    Meta Platforms, Inc. 2023. Facebook Privacy Policy. Available at https://www.facebook.com/privacy/policy, accessed March 2024

    2023

  113. [121]

    Zhongtao Miao, Qiyu Wu, Kaiyan Zhao, Zilong Wu, and Yoshimasa Tsuruoka. 2024. Enhancing Cross-lingual Sentence Embedding for Low-resource Languages with Word Alignment. InFindings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: NAACL 2024, Kevin Duh, Helena Gomez, and Steven...

    2024 doi

  114. [122]

    Martin, P

    J. Martin, P. Johnson, and D. Chang. 2022. AI and Mental Health: Privacy Challenges and Solutions.IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems9, 3 (2022), 180–192

    2022

  115. [123]

    Justus Mattern, Benjamin Weggenmann, and Florian Kerschbaum. 2022. The Limits of Word Level Differential Privacy. InFindings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: NAACL 2022, Marine Carpuat, Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, and Ivan Vladimir Meza Ruiz (Eds.). Associati...

    2022 doi

  116. [124]

    Fatemehsadat Mireshghallah, Kartik Goyal, Archit Uniyal, Taylor Berg-Kirkpatrick, and Reza Shokri. 2022. Quantifying Privacy Risks of Masked Language Models Using Membership Inference Attacks. InProceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Proces...

    2022

  117. [125]

    Yichuan Mo, Yuji Wang, Zeming Wei, and Yisen Wang. 2024. Fight back against jailbreaking via prompt adversarial tuning. InThe Thirty-eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems

    2024

  118. [126]

    Morris, Florian Tramer, and Nicholas Carlini

    Robert T. Morris, Florian Tramer, and Nicholas Carlini. 2024. Language Model Inversion: Recovering Training Data from Language Models. InProceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR)

    2024

  119. [127]

    Maria Milkova, Maksim Rudnev, and Lidia Okolskaya. 2023. Detecting value-expressive text posts in Russian social media.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.08968(2023)

    2023

  120. [128]

    Helen Milner and Michael Baron. 2023. Establishing an optimal online phishing detection method: Evaluating topological NLP transformers on text message data.Journal of Data Science and Intelligent Systems2, 1 (July 2023), 37–45. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: Aug...

    2023

  121. [129]

    Helen Nissenbaum. 2019. Contextual Integrity Up and Down the Data Food Chain.Theoretical Inquiries in Law20, 1 (2019), 221–256

    2019

  122. [130]

    State of California Department of Justice. 2026. California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). https://oag.ca.gov/privacy/ ccpa

    2026

  123. [131]

    OpenAlex Help Center. 2024. Where do works in OpenAlex come from? https://help.openalex.org/hc/en-us/articles/ 24347019383191-Where-do-works-in-OpenAlex-come-from. Accessed: 2026-02-02

    2024

  124. [132]

    Kai Nakamura, Sharon Levy, and William Yang Wang. 2020. Fakeddit: A new multimodal benchmark dataset for fine-grained fake news detection. InProceedings of the twelfth language resources and evaluation conference. 6149–6157

    2020

  125. [133]

    Qiong Nan, Qiang Sheng, Juan Cao, Beizhe Hu, Danding Wang, and Jintao Li. 2024. Let silence speak: Enhancing fake news detection with generated comments from large language models. InProceedings of the 33rd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. ...

    2024

  126. [134]

    Stefanos-Iordanis Papadopoulos, Christos Koutlis, Symeon Papadopoulos, and Panagiotis C Petrantonakis. 2024. Verite: a robust benchmark for multimodal misinformation detection accounting for unimodal bias.International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval13, 1 (2024), 4

    2024

  127. [135]

    Constantinos Patsakis and Nikolaos Lykousas. 2023. Man vs the machine in the struggle for effective text anonymisa- tion in the age of large language models.Scientific Reports13, 1 (2023), 16026

    2023

  128. [136]

    David Patterson, Joseph Gonzalez, Quoc Le, Chen Liang, Lluis-Miquel Munguia, Daniel Rothchild, David So, Maud Texier, and Jeff Dean. 2021. Carbon emissions and large neural network training.arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.10350 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  129. [137]

    Nikolaos Panagiotou, Antonia Saravanou, and Dimitrios Gunopulos. 2021. News Monitor: A framework for exploring news in real-time.Data (Basel)7, 1 (Dec. 2021), 3

    2021

  130. [138]

    Subhadarshi Panda and Sarah Ita Levitan. 2021. Detecting multilingual COVID-19 misinformation on social media via contextualized embeddings. InProceedings of the Fourth Workshop on NLP for Internet Freedom: Censorship, Disinformation, and Propaganda(Online). Association for Co...

    2021

  131. [139]

    Sai Puppala, Ismail Hossain, Md Jahangir Alam, and Sajedul Talukder. 2024. FLASH: Federated Learning-Based LLMs for Advanced Query Processing in Social Networks through RAG. (2024), 281–293

    2024

  132. [140]

    Sai Puppala, Ismail Hossain, Md Jahangir Alam, and Sajedul Talukder. 2024. SocFedGPT: Federated GPT-Based Adaptive Content Filtering System Leveraging User Interactions in Social Networks. InInternational Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining. Springer, 79–88

    2024

  133. [141]

    Shengsheng Qian, Jinguang Wang, Jun Hu, Quan Fang, and Changsheng Xu. 2021. Hierarchical Multi-modal Contextual Attention Network for Fake News Detection. InProceedings of the 44th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval(Virtual ...

    2021

  134. [142]

    Protik Bose Pranto, Syed Zami-Ul-Haque Navid, Protik Dey, Gias Uddin, and Anindya Iqbal. 2022. Are you misin- formed? a study of covid-related fake news in bengali on facebook.arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.11669(2022)

    2022 arXiv

  135. [143]

    Haritz Puerto, Martin Gubri, Sangdoo Yun, and Seong Joon Oh. 2025. Scaling Up Membership Inference: When and How Attacks Succeed on Large Language Models. InFindings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: NAACL 2025, Luis Chiruzzo, Alan Ritter, and Lu Wang (Eds.). A...

    2025 doi

  136. [144]

    David Ramamonjisoa and Shuma Suzuki. 2024. Comments Analysis in Social Media based on LLM Agents. InCS & IT Conference Proceedings, Vol. 14

    2024

  137. [145]

    Junaid Rashid, Jungeun Kim, and Anum Masood. 2024. Unraveling the Tangle of Disinformation: A Multimodal Approach for Fake News Identification on Social Media. InCompanion Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2024 , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: August 2026. Larg...

    2024

  138. [146]

    V Rathinapriya and J Kalaivani. 2024. Adaptive weighted feature fusion for multiscale atrous convolution-based 1DCNN with dilated LSTM-aided fake news detection using regional language text information.Expert Systems (2024), e13665

    2024

  139. [147]

    Kristina Radivojevic, Nicholas Clark, and Paul Brenner. 2024. LLMs Among Us: Generative AI participating in digital discourse.Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series3, 1 (May 2024), 209–218

    2024

  140. [148]

    Sarika S Raga and Chaitra B. 2022. A bert model for sms and twitter spam ham classification and comparative study of machine learning and deep learning technique. In2022 IEEE 7th International Conference on Recent Advances and Innovations in Engineering (ICRAIE)(MANGALORE, Ind...

    2022

  141. [149]

    Marko Sahan, Vaclav Smidl, and Radek Marik. 2021. Active Learning for Text Classification and Fake News Detection. In2021 International Symposium on Computer Science and Intelligent Controls (ISCSIC). 87–94

    2021

  142. [150]

    Siva Sai. 2020. Siva at WNUT-2020 task 2: Fine-tuning transformer neural networks for identification of informative covid-19 tweets. InProceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Noisy User-generated Text (W-NUT 2020)(Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, USA

    2020

  143. [151]

    Amine Sallah, El Arbi Abdellaoui Alaoui, Said Agoujil, Mudasir Ahmad Wani, Mohamed Hammad, Yassine Maleh, and Ahmed A Abd El-Latif. 2024. Fine-tuned understanding: Enhancing social bot detection with transformer-based classification.IEEE Access12 (2024), 118250–118269

    2024

  144. [152]

    Prismahardi Aji Riyantoko, Tresna Maulana Fahrudin, Dwi Arman Prasetya, Trimono Trimono, and Tahta Dari Timur

  145. [153]

    Victor Sanh, Lysandre Debut, Julien Chaumond, and Thomas Wolf. 2019. DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter.arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.01108(2019)

    2019 arXiv

  146. [154]

    Daniel Russo, Serra Sinem Tekiroğlu, and Marco Guerini. 2023. Benchmarking the Generation of Fact Checking Explanations.Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics11 (2023), 1250–1264

    2023

  147. [155]

    Ali Satvaty, Suzan Verberne, and Fatih Turkmen. 2024. Undesirable Memorization in Large Language Models: A Survey. InarXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02650

    2024

  148. [156]

    Isabel Segura-Bedmar and Santiago Alonso-Bartolome. 2022. Multimodal fake news detection.Information13, 6 (2022), 284

    2022

  149. [157]

    Samaneh Shafee, Alysson Bessani, and Pedro M Ferreira. 2025. Evaluation of LLM-based chatbots for OSINT-based Cyber Threat Awareness.Expert Systems with Applications261 (2025), 125509

    2025

  150. [158]

    Kanti Singh Sangher, Archana Singh, and Hari Mohan Pandey. 2024. LSTM and BERT based transformers models for cyber threat intelligence for intent identification of social media platforms exploitation from darknet forums.Int. J. Inf. Technol.16, 8 (Dec. 2024), 5277–5292

    2024

  151. [159]

    Fangfang Shan, Huifang Sun, and Mengyi Wang. 2024. Multimodal Social Media Fake News Detection Based on Similarity Inference and Adversarial Networks.Computers, Materials & Continua79, 1 (2024)

    2024

  152. [160]

    Filippo Santoni de Sio and Giulio Mecacci. 2021. Four responsibility gaps with artificial intelligence: Why they matter and how to address them.Philosophy & technology34, 4 (2021), 1057–1084

    2021

  153. [161]

    Karishma Sharma, Emilio Ferrara, and Yan Liu. 2022. Construction of large-scale misinformation labeled datasets from social media discourse using label refinement. InProceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022. 3755–3764

    2022

  154. [162]

    Utkarsh Sharma, Prateek Pandey, and Shishir Kumar. 2022. A transformer-based model for evaluation of information relevance in online social-media: A case study of Covid-19 media posts.New Gener. Comput.40, 4 (Jan. 2022), 1029–1052

    2022

  155. [163]

    Sachin Ashok Shinde et al. 2025. NLP-Based Investigation of Textual and Semantic Cues in Fake News Identification. In2025 International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Knowledge Economy (ICCIKE). IEEE, 235–240

    2025

  156. [164]

    Siddhant Bikram Shah, Surendrabikram Thapa, Ashish Acharya, Kritesh Rauniyar, Sweta Poudel, Sandesh Jain, Anum Masood, and Usman Naseem. 2024. Navigating the web of disinformation and misinformation: Large language models as double-edged swords.IEEE Access(2024), 1–1

    2024

  157. [165]

    Kai Shu, Amy Sliva, Suhang Wang, Jiliang Tang, and Huan Liu. 2017. Fake news detection on social media: A data mining perspective.ACM SIGKDD explorations newsletter19, 1 (2017), 22–36

    2017

  158. [166]

    Filipo Sharevski, Jennifer Vander Loop, Peter Jachim, Amy Devine, and Emma Pieroni. 2023. Talking abortion (mis) information with chatgpt on tiktok. In2023 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy Workshops (EuroS&PW). IEEE, 594–608

    2023

  159. [167]

    Utsav Shukla, Manan Vyas, and Shailendra Tiwari. 2023. Raphael at ArAIEval shared task: Understanding persua- sive language and tone, an LLM approach. InProceedings of ArabicNLP 2023(Singapore (Hybrid)). Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, USA, 589–593....

    2023

  160. [168]

    Nathalie A Smuha. 2025. Regulation 2024/1689 of the Eur. Parl. & Council of June 13, 2024 (EU Artificial Intelligence Act).International Legal Materials(2025), 1–148

    2025

  161. [169]

    Giovanni Spitale, Nikola Biller-Andorno, and Federico Germani. 2023. AI model GPT-3 (dis) informs us better than humans.Science Advances9, 26 (2023), eadh1850

    2023

  162. [170]

    Kai Shu, Deepak Mahudeswaran, Suhang Wang, Dongwon Lee, and Huan Liu. 2020. Fakenewsnet: A data repository with news content, social context, and spatiotemporal information for studying fake news on social media.Big data 8, 3 (2020), 171–188

    2020

  163. [171]

    Andrei Stipiuc. 2024. Romanian Media Landscape in 7 Journalists’ Facebook Posts: A ChatGPT Sentiment Analysis. SAECULUM57, 1 (2024), 20–46

    2024

  164. [172]

    Kai Shu, Suhang Wang, Dongwon Lee, and Huan Liu. 2020. Mining disinformation and fake news: Concepts, methods, and recent advancements.Disinformation, misinformation, and fake news in social media: Emerging research challenges and opportunities(2020), 1–19

    2020

  165. [173]

    Ningxin Su, Chenghao Hu, Baochun Li, and Bo Li. 2024. TITANIC: Towards Production Federated Learning with Large Language Models. InProceedings of IEEE INFOCOM

    2024

  166. [174]

    Megha Sundriyal, Harshit Choudhary, Tanmoy Chakraborty, and Md Shad Akhtar. 2024. Crowd Intelligence for Early Misinformation Prediction on Social Media.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.04463(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  167. [175]

    B N1 Supriya and CB Akki. 2022. P-BERT: Polished Up Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers for Predicting Malicious URL to Preserve Privacy. In2022 IEEE 9th Uttar Pradesh Section International Conference on Electrical, Electronics and Computer Engineering (UPC...

    2022

  168. [176]

    Robin Staab, Mark Vero, Mislav Balunović, and Martin Vechev. 2024. Beyond Memorization: Violating Privacy via Inference with Large Language Models. InProceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations

    2024

  169. [177]

    Ahmed Tlili, Boulus Shehata, Michael Agyemang Adarkwah, Aras Bozkurt, Daniel T Hickey, Ronghuai Huang, and Brighter Agyemang. 2023. What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education.Smart Learn. Environ.10, 1 (Feb. 2023)

    2023

  170. [178]

    Emma Strubell, Ananya Ganesh, and Andrew McCallum. 2019. Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in NLP. InProceedings of the 57th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics. 3645–3650

    2019

  171. [179]

    Batuhan Tömekçe, Mark Vero, Robin Staab, and Martin Vechev. 2024. Private attribute inference from images with vision-language models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems37 (2024), 103619–103651

    2024

  172. [180]

    Ben Treves, Md Rayhanul Masud, and Michalis Faloutsos. 2023. RURLMAN: Matching Forum Users Across Platforms Using Their Posted URLs. InProceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining. 484–491

    2023

  173. [181]

    Milena Tsvetkova, Taha Yasseri, Niccolo Pescetelli, and Tobias Werner. 2024. A new sociology of humans and machines.Nature Human Behaviour8, 10 (Oct. 2024), 1864–1876. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02001-8

    2024 doi

  174. [182]

    Yingjie Tian and Yuhao Xie. 2024. Artificial cheerleading in IEO: Marketing campaign or pump and dump scheme. Inf. Process. Manag.61, 1 (Jan. 2024), 103537

    2024

  175. [183]

    2021.Using Social Media in Community-Based Protection

    UNHCR. 2021.Using Social Media in Community-Based Protection. Retrieved January, 2021 from https://www.unhcr. org/innovation/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Using-Social-Media-in-CBP.pdf

    2021

  176. [184]

    Christopher K Tokita, Kevin Aslett, William P Godel, Zeve Sanderson, Joshua A Tucker, Jonathan Nagler, Nathaniel Persily, and Richard Bonneau. 2024. Measuring receptivity to misinformation at scale on a social media platform. PNAS nexus3, 10 (2024), pgae396

    2024

  177. [185]

    Standford University. 2024. The 2024 AI Index Report. https://hai.stanford.edu/ai-index/2024-ai-index-report

    2024

  178. [186]

    Soroush Vosoughi, Deb Roy, and Sinan Aral. 2018. The spread of true and false news online.science359, 6380 (2018)

    2018

  179. [187]

    Nazmi Ekin Vural and Sefer Kalaman. 2024. Using Artificial Intelligence Systems in News Verification: An Application on X.İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi67 (2024), 127–141

    2024

  180. [188]

    2017.Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest

    Zeynep Tufekci. 2017.Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. Yale University Press

    2017

  181. [189]

    Xiao Wang, Jinyuan Sun, Jinyuan Zhang, Neil Shah, and Bo Li. 2024. Prompt Inversion: Leveraging Attention-Based Inversion to Recover Prompts from Language Models. InProceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR)

    2024

  182. [190]

    GDPR European Union. 2026. Complete guide to GDPR compliance. https://gdpr.eu/

    2026

  183. [191]

    Shieber, and Alexander M

    Sam Wiseman, Stuart M. Shieber, and Alexander M. Rush. 2018. Learning Neural Templates for Text Generation. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). Association for Computational Linguistics, 3174–3187

    2018

  184. [192]

    Yunfei Xing, Justin Zuopeng Zhang, Guangqing Teng, and Xiaotang Zhou. 2024. Voices in the digital storm: Unraveling online polarization with ChatGPT.Technology in Society77 (2024), 102534

    2024

  185. [193]

    Junjie Xiong, Changjia Zhu, Shuhang Lin, Chong Zhang, Yongfeng Zhang, Yao Liu, and Lingyao Li. 2025. Invisible Prompts, Visible Threats: Malicious Font Injection in External Resources for Large Language Models. InFindings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2025

    2025

  186. [194]

    Liar, Liar Pants on Fire

    William Yang Wang. 2017. “Liar, Liar Pants on Fire”: A New Benchmark Dataset for Fake News Detection. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL). 422–426

    2017

  187. [195]

    Junhao Xu, Longdi Xian, Zening Liu, Mingliang Chen, Qiuyang Yin, and Fenghua Song. 2024. The future of combating rumors? retrieval, discrimination, and generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.20204(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  188. [196]

    2017.Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policymaking

    Claire Wardle and Hossein Derakhshan. 2017.Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policymaking. Vol. 27. Council of Europe Strasbourg

    2017

  189. [197]

    Hongwei Yan, Liyuan Wang, Kaisheng Ma, and Yi Zhong. 2024. Orchestrate latent expertise: Advancing online continual learning with multi-level supervision and reverse self-distillation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 23670–23680

    2024

  190. [198]

    Chang Yang, Peng Zhang, Wenbo Qiao, Hui Gao, and Jiaming Zhao. 2023. Rumor detection on social media with crowd intelligence and ChatGPT-assisted networks. InProceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 5705–5717

    2023

  191. [199]

    Kaicheng Yang and Filippo Menczer. 2024. Anatomy of an AI-powered malicious social botnet.J. Quant. Descr. Digit. Media4 (May 2024)

    2024

  192. [200]

    Guangxia Xu, Daiqi Zhou, and Jun Liu. 2021. Social network spam detection based on ALBERT and combination of Bi-LSTM with self-attention.Secur. Commun. Netw.2021 (April 2021), 1–11. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: August 2026. Large Language Models and Social Medi...

    2021

  193. [201]

    Barry Menglong Yao, Aditya Shah, Lichao Sun, Jin-Hee Cho, and Lifu Huang. 2023. End-to-end multimodal fact- checking and explanation generation: A challenging dataset and models. InProceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Inform...

    2023

  194. [202]

    Keyang Xuan, Li Yi, Fan Yang, Ruochen Wu, Yi R Fung, and Heng Ji. 2024. LEMMA: towards LVLM-enhanced multimodal misinformation detection with external knowledge augmentation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.11943(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  195. [203]

    Yuhang Yao, Jianyi Zhang, Junda Wu, Chengkai Huang, Yu Xia, Tong Yu, Ruiyi Zhang, Sungchul Kim, and Rossi. 2024. Federated large language models: Current progress and future directions.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.15723(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  196. [204]

    Junshuai Yu, Qi Huang, Xiaofei Zhou, and Ying Sha. 2020. IARNet: An Information Aggregating and Reasoning Network over Heterogeneous Graph for Fake News Detection. In2020 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN). 1–9

    2020

  197. [205]

    Zhenrui Yue, Huimin Zeng, Yang Zhang, Lanyu Shang, and Dong Wang. 2023. MetaAdapt: Domain Adaptive Few- Shot Misinformation Detection via Meta Learning. InProceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), Anna Roge...

    2023 doi

  198. [206]

    Yingguang Yang, Renyu Yang, Hao Peng, Yangyang Li, Tong Li, Yong Liao, and Pengyuan Zhou. 2023. FedACK: Federated adversarial contrastive knowledge distillation for cross-lingual and cross-model social bot detection. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2023. 1314–1323

    2023

  199. [207]

    Jinyuan Zhang, Xinyue Chen, Xuechen Li, and Cho-Jui Hsieh. 2024. Membership Inference Attacks against Fine-tuned Large Language Models via Self-prompt Calibration. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS)

    2024

  200. [208]

    Xin Yao, Tianchi Huang, Chenglei Wu, Rui-Xiao Zhang, and Lifeng Sun. 2019. Federated learning with additional mechanisms on clients to reduce communication costs.arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.05891(2019)

    2019 arXiv

  201. [209]

    Xiang Zhang, Yufei Cui, Chenchen Fu, Zihao Wang, Yuyang Sun, Xue Liu, and Weiwei Wu. 2025. Transtreaming: Adaptive Delay-aware Transformer for Real-time Streaming Perception. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 39. 10185–10193

    2025

  202. [210]

    Thinking Slow

    Yiming Zhang, Sravani Nanduri, Liwei Jiang, Tongshuang Wu, and Maarten Sap. 2023. BiasX: “Thinking Slow” in Toxic Content Moderation with Explanations of Implied Social Biases. InProceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Houda Boua...

    2023 doi

  203. [211]

    Yizhou Zhang, Karishma Sharma, Lun Du, and Yan Liu. 2024. Toward mitigating misinformation and social media manipulation in LLM era. InCompanion Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2024(Singapore Singapore), Vol. 19. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1302–1305

    2024

  204. [212]

    Hanna Yukhymenko, Robin Staab, Mark Vero, and Martin Vechev. 2024. A synthetic dataset for personal attribute inference. InProceedings of the 38th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems(Vancouver, BC, Canada)(NIPS ’24). Curran Associates Inc., Red Ho...

    2024

  205. [213]

    Xinyi Zhou, Ashish Sharma, Amy X Zhang, and Tim Althoff. 2024. Correcting misinformation on social media with a large language model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.11169(2024)

    2024

  206. [214]

    Tong Zhang, Di Wang, Huanhuan Chen, Zhiwei Zeng, Wei Guo, Chunyan Miao, and Lizhen Cui. 2020. BDANN: BERT-Based Domain Adaptation Neural Network for Multi-Modal Fake News Detection. In2020 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN). 1–8

    2020

  207. [215]

    fingerprints

    Liu Zhuang, Lin Wayne, Shi Ya, and Zhao Jun. 2021. A Robustly Optimized BERT Pre-training Approach with Post-training. InProceedings of the 20th Chinese National Conference on Computational Linguistics, Sheng Li, Maosong Sun, Yang Liu, Hua Wu, Kang Liu, Wanxiang Che, Shizhu He...

    2021

  208. [218]

    Chenye Zhao and Cornelia Caragea. 2021. Knowledge distillation with BERT for image tag-based privacy prediction. InProceedings of the International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP 2021)

    2021

  209. [220]

    Xinyi Zhou and Reza Zafarani. 2020. A survey of fake news: Fundamental theories, detection methods, and opportu- nities.ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR)53, 5 (2020), 1–40

    2020

  210. [222]

    demonstrate how label prediction can effectively abstract content while minimizing sensitive data exposure. In URL filtering contexts, P-BERT introduced by Supriya and Akki [175] shows significant potential in integrating deep feature extraction with BERT for malicious link de...

  211. [223]

    Privacy-preserving synthetic data generation, such as SynthPAI by Yukhymenko et al

    demonstrating how differentially private stochastic gradient descent during fine-tuning can effectively limit model memorization of individual data points. Privacy-preserving synthetic data generation, such as SynthPAI by Yukhymenko et al. [206], offers a solution to avoid dir...

  212. [224]

    [118] regarding LLMs’ ability to infer user traits through subtle linguistic cues

    and Mattern et al. [118] regarding LLMs’ ability to infer user traits through subtle linguistic cues. Real-time monitoring and accountability systems represent crucial advancements in privacy protection. For example, Kim et al . [93] and Asimopoulos et al . [9] demonstrate pot...

    2026

  213. [225]

    In sensitive topic analysis, Cai et al

    underscores the challenge of preventing unauthorized behavior pattern analysis that could expose users’ personal lives, health, and relationship information. In sensitive topic analysis, Cai et al . [24] identifies the critical challenge of balancing analytical capabilities wi...

    2026

  214. [2019]

    2019), 10620–10623

    Twitter Spam Detection using Pre-trained Model.International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)8, 4 (Nov. 2019), 10620–10623

    2019

  215. [2022]

    2022), 103–111

    Analisis Sentimen Sederhana Menggunakan Algoritma LSTM dan BERT untuk Klasifikasi Data Spam dan Non-Spam.PROSIDING SEMINAR NASIONAL SAINS DATA2, 1 (Dec. 2022), 103–111

    2022

  216. [2024]

    2024), gae368

    Incentivizing news consumption on social media platforms using large language models and realistic bot accounts.PNAS Nexus3, 9 (Sept. 2024), gae368

    2024

  217. [2025]

    4160–4170. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: August 2026. Large Language Models and Social Media Information Integrity: Opportunities, Challenges, and Research Directions 31

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.